Adapting the Ontario teacher performance appraisal manual to video-based teacher assessment / by Eric Fredrickson.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study asks if a teacher appraisal tool, the Ontario "Teacher Performance Appraisal Manual" (TPAM) can be modified toward the assessment of pre-service teacher competencies as viewed in archived videoconference lessons. Seven pre-service teachers worked in small groups to deliver the same lesson two times (six lessons were delivered in total) from a Education to six groups of two or three grade seven and eight Science students in a regular classroom. The lessons were archived to video compact disc (VCD). The researcher worked with two Education professors to develop an initial modification of the TPAM, a modification that they felt was suited to video-based assessment. The modified scale was provided to a group of five principals along with a VCD of one of the videoconference lessons. Feedback provided by the principals was used to confirm the suitability o f the scale and to modify it further. \nA re-modified scale was sent to the same group of principals along with five VCD lessons. The principals? feedback regarding the re-modified scale suggested that further modification was not required. \nThree lines of evidence are presented to support the argument that \nmodification of the TPAM was successfully accomplished; the nature of the \nindicators of the modified scale conforms to expectations derived from the \nliterature review, principals (experts in the use of the TPAM for teacher \nperformance assessment) rated the utility of each of the scale?s indicators as being suited or highly-suited to video-based assessment, the principals were able to use the modified scale to assess performance in archived videoconference lessons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".